MR. MCCURRY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen,
friends, fellow travelers. I'm just going to take a brief minute and go
through the morning discussion. All of it's reflected in the Chairman's
Statement and the separate declaration you've received on Bosnia. But
just to highlight this morning's discussions, the leaders began the
discussion of Bosnia that's now reflected in the separate statement that
you've seen.

There was some discussion on the sanctions question, on
how to use the Dayton language to reinforce the leaders' call on those
with influence on the Republic of Herzegovina to bring pressure to bear
on both Karadzic and Mladic to step aside and present themselves for
justice at The Hague.

A lengthy discussion about Korea, about the Korean
Peninsula Energy Development Organization; the President calling upon
the European Union to assist in the financing of activities of KEDO. A
discussion of where we are on the comprehensive test ban treaty in light
of the discussions in Geneva over the past several days -- again, the
outcome of that discussion reflected in the Chairman's Statement.

A long discussion of land mines because of an initiative
put forward by Prime Minister Hashimoto, who very effectively presented
the case for further action by the world community to limit the
destructive power of antipersonnel land mines. The President in his
intervention on that subject noted the initiative that he himself has
put forward that you're all familiar with.

More discussion of the environment, Chancellor Kohl
continuing his discussion of that issue from last night. I've checked
with people here and there's some consensus this is probably the longest
and most vibrant discussion of environmental protection that the leaders
at the G-7 have ever engaged in -- or at the 8. And the that the
President, of course, welcomed and thought was very significant.

The afternoon discussion just concluded -- or the midday
discussion with the leaders of international organizations, was very
useful in the President's view. Secretary General Boutros-Ghali
discussed United Nations reform. The question of his tenure did not
arise in that discussion. They also heard, of course, from
representatives of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and
the World Trade Organization -- all very good discussions. Some of it
reflected a great deal of the discussion with the economic institutions
about the economic communique released by the seven leaders yesterday.

The President is in a short while planning to meet, as you
know, with Prime Minister Chernomyrdin. He will, of course, inquire
about President Yeltsin's health and express the concern of the American
people and just inquire how he's doing. We have not heard anything new
on that subject today.

They will review the process and the environment for the
run-off election July 3rd. The President will focus a great deal of
attention on the work of the Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission and inquire
about some of the issues that are in that channel for discussion. And
then, after that, you will all have an opportunity to ask the President
how successful he thinks this summit meeting has been, and the answer I
can predict will be predictable.

Q Mike, can you illuminate a couple of points on the
Bosnia statement? Number one, on the first page in regard to the
elections, there would seem to be some mission creep for IFOR with the
G-7 or 8 calling for IFOR troops to guarantee a safe environment on the
day of the election. And the other thing in regard to the ultimatum to
Karadzic, is that to be interpreted that if that doesn't happen,
sanctions will be reimposed on Serbia?

MR. MCCURRY: Well, let's -- let me take each of those
separately. Recall that earlier this month in Brussels the permanent
representatives of the North Atlantic Council met to review the status
of the implementation force and its mission. There were considerable
discussions with NATO military commanders as well and with SACEUR about
the taskings that can go to IFOR troops as resources are freed up and
the mission objectives that were outlined in the Dayton Accords and the
military annex to the Dayton Accords are met.

You'll recall that at that time in early June both the
military commanders of NATO and the political representatives announced
that they were doing things like stepping up patrols that would allow
for the greater access and freedom of movement in Bosnia-Herzegovina;
that they were taking steps to secure movement of international
personnel involved in humanitarian activities.

The design of this element of the declaration by the United
States -- and this was, indeed, a U.S. initiative put forward here in
Lyon -- was to suggest that at the election time in September, or
whenever the election is scheduled -- September most likely -- the safe
and secure environment that is required for those elections can be
assisted by IFOR. The exact same things that they have been tasked to
do by the military commanders in connection with freedom of movement
could equally apply to election monitors, to those who will actually
conduct the election. And there was a sense here that the international
community -- the world leaders here -- should speak in support of the
election process by indicating that that specific task would be within
the mission as it's currently outlines.

So, in short, no change in the mission. In fact, the
mission objectives, as they've been outlined since Dayton, have included
the creation of a safe and secure environment that will allow for the
transformation that must take place in Bosnia.

Q What about the --

MR. MCCURRY: And then on the second point, clearly, from
the presentation that we heard from Carl Bildt, there is desire to
encourage Milosevic to encourage Serbia to bring greater pressure to
bear on Mr. Karadzic. And the very pointed statement about Mr.
Karadzic in the declaration -- the reference to assistance that's
available once he is removed from the political life of that country and
the suggestion that there can be economic consequences if these
procedures don't move forward is clear.

Now, Mr. Bildt has indicated publicly that he is
considering the question of sanctions. I am not aware, as it has been
reported, that he has set some kind of deadline. But the leaders here
had a consensus that they would be supportive of Mr. Bildt. Mr. Bildt
has the authority to request further sanctions or a replacement of
sanctions on Serbia if the goals and timetables of the Dayton Accords
are not met.

Q -- the American mediator Kornblum has indeed suggested
to Milosevic that there is a date by which time Karadzic should be gone?

MR. MCCURRY: Barry's question was whether or not Assistant
Secretary Kornblum in his meetings with Melosevic in Belgrade suggested
there is some kind of timetable. Not to my knowledge, Barry, although
he did suggest that we are ever more urgent about the need to move ahead
with the stipulations of the Dayton Accords as they relate to indicted
war criminals; that they ought to be removed from the political life of
Bosnia, as the declaration suggests; that they're removed from any
public or governmental decision-making role; and that they should be
presented forthwith to The Hague for prosecution.

Q How would new sanctions be triggered? Is it just the
recommendation of Carl Bildt, and would these leaders have to meet
again, or would others have to?

MR. MCCURRY: Anne, under the Dayton Accords, and Barry
will probably remember this better than I do, but under the Dayton
Accords and the implementing decisions of the U.N. Security Council,
there is an outer wall of sanctions that can be retriggered if there is
unsatisfactory progress towards implementing the goals of Dayton. And
so this would be a request by Mr. Bildt back to the U.N. Security
Council. But the U.N. Security Council has continued to be seized of
this issue, and he indicated its willingness to consider a reimposition
of sanctions if there's any backsliding on implementations of the Dayton
Accord.

Q Was there any discussion in this large meeting of the
Russian election, the run-off? And can you talk a little about the
dynamic with Chernomrydin?

MR. MCCURRY: There was, my understanding is, more of a
discussion about the current dynamic in Russia during yesterday and last
evening's discussions. Mr. Chernomyrdin, as he often is, is very well
briefed, very well rehearsed in the intricacies of the issues being
dealt with here in Lyon. He made considerable contributions in the
Bosnia discussion this morning. In all the subjects related to -- the
conversations related to Iran and others, he's quite knowledgeable. And
we know from our own bilateral sessions with him, he's been a very
active and effective participant in these discussions.

He usually does not go beyond his brief. That has been his
practice, and it is accurate to say that's essentially what he did here.
We look forward to, of course, exploring the bilateral issues that we
always address with the Russian Federation when the President meets with
him in a short while.

Q Just to follow up, did the other leaders give him any
message they want him to carry back to Moscow for Russian progress after
this election is over?

MR. MCCURRY: The references in the documents you've
already seen towards the Russian Federation, towards the importance of
progress towards democracy, the importance of this election on July 3rd,
I think was made much more personal by the interventions of many
leaders, including the President. And this is a historic moment for the
Russian Federation. It's an important election. The importance of the
Russian people going to the polls and making this choice is one sign of
the progress Russia is making towards democracy. And that point was
reinforced several times by several of the leaders here.

Q Mike, you talked about the amount of time the leaders
were engaged in talking about the environment. And Dan sort of
indicated that that was not part of the script and the expectation.
Other than the general language, what can you say about their interest
that was leading toward the future or initiatives or -- where does it
go?

MR. MCCURRY: Well, the President made clear in his
discussion -- and you'll recall yesterday I outlined some of the general
issues of globalization that he addressed in his second intervention
yesterday -- but one was that all these industrialized nations are
grappling with the question of how can we simultaneously encourage
economic growth, how can we encouraged sustainable development in the
less-developed world, how can we take emerging economies that are
transforming themselves and do so in a way that continues to protect the
global environment. That was a very rich discussion.

I'd say Chancellor Kohl contributed most significantly to
that discussion, because it's an issue that he has dealt with very
directly and very personally. But it's clear from that discussion and
from the concentration on that issue that this will be a key focus of
the G-7 summit in Denver. And the President fully expects a greater
degree of attention by each government as it works on the walk-up to the
Denver summit on that question.

I can say almost the same thing on the issue of terrorism.
It's clear that the interest in that subject by the leaders here,
certainly the tragic events that we've witnessed around the world would
require greater focus on that issue in Denver. And, indeed, the
President's already indicated that will be a key focus in Denver.

Q -- how different was this summit in the absence of Boris
Yeltsin?

MR. MCCURRY: Well, President Yeltsin is always a very
energetic and vibrant participant in the discussions, so it had a
somewhat different flavor. But, again, there were some new faces here.
Prime Minister Prodi, of course, was attending his first. Even though
Prime Minister Hashimoto, this is his first G-7 summit as a leader, he
had participated in the past as trade minister or a finance minister.
But he was, of course, attending his very first, so it's a different
combination of personalities.

What I say about the President's role is that he is no
longer the new kid on the block. In fact, he, in terms of seniority, I
think, ranks third in the leaders. So he is now something of a veteran
when it comes to these discussions. And it makes it possible for him to
have more shorthand formulas, particularly when he is engaged with
people around the table that he knows quite well -- Chancellor Kohl,
President Chirac, Prime Minister Major especially.

So the flavor of this conversation is -- it always changes
given the different mix of personalities there, but certainly the
discussion with respect to the Russian Federation or market reforms in
Russia or international lending to Russia did not suffer any by the
absence of President Yeltsin, given the worthiness of Prime Minister
Chernomyrdin as an interlocutor.

Q Speaking of the mix of personalities, what was the
atmosphere when President Clinton was meeting with Boutros-Ghali? Was
it frosty, was it cordial?

MR. MCCURRY: I am told that it was matter of fact and
straightforward.

Q Mike, getting back to September 14th --

MR. MCCURRY: -- straightforward may have sounded frosty.
(Laughter.) And it shouldn't have. It should have been -- it was
correct and dignified. How about that? Does that pass muster in your
place of employment? Okay. (Laughter.)

Q In regard to the IFOR role on election day, you
mentioned that they've stepped up roles for freedom of movement. On
election day, if you have a group of, let's say, Croats wanting to go
vote in an area controlled by Serbs, and the Serbs stop them, is that a
mission on election day where these voters can go to an IFOR unit and
say, escort me to the polling station?

MR. MCCURRY: Leo, I'm not going to speculate on the
environment that will exist on election day. I don't think that's wise
to do. But the right of citizens to vote in their place of original
residence, which is a feature of the Dayton Accord, and the freedom of
movement aspects of the Dayton Accords themselves, which are being
enforced by IFOR, would allow for people to get to the polling places,
would allow for election monitors to be where they need to be, would
allow for those who are going to be conducting the election to carry out
their work. That is all within the framework of the Dayton Accord, and
certainly is all suggested by the phrase "safe and secure environment."
And the United States, of course, hopes that and has reason to expect
that this election can be conducted in a peaceful environment.

Q Did the President ask to be updated on any of the
information coming out of Saudi Arabia now on the investigation on the
wreckage of this truck and possible ID --

MR. MCCURRY: The President is obviously following those
issues very closely. As you know, Secretary of Defense Perry is now in
Dhahran and we'll be in a position to report back to him. I'm sure that
the President will want to have all the latest information before he
meets with the families of the victims tomorrow.

Q And the size of the FBI team that's there?

MR. MCCURRY: There are, I understand, 80 FBI investigators
on the ground. They are enjoying good cooperation from Saudi
authorities and they are continuing a very extensive forensic analysis
of the site and continuing their investigation.

Q Mike, was President Chirac's comment that the 9.7
million jobs wouldn't fit in a European model taken as a slap in the
face? And more importantly, do you still stand by Mr. Stiglitz's
statistics which claim that the majority of these jobs are, in fact,
high wages positions?

MR. MCCURRY: Yes, and they are. The question was really
about President Chirac's concern about the nature of job creation in the
United States. The jobs, as you know, two-thirds of the 9.7 million
jobs, or roughly two-thirds of those jobs, have been created in the last
three years, pay above average minimum wage -- I mean, excuse me, above
average hourly wage rates. And, in general, they have been concentrated
in sectors of the economy that are showing growth and can kind of
provide higher wages as we look ahead to the future.

President Chirac is certainly correct that some of these --
some -- of these jobs have been in lower income paying categories or
sectors. But on balance, the performance of the U.S. economy is strong.
On balance, the income wage rate increase that we just recently
experienced is an encouraging sign.

And certainly, the President took no offense at President
Chirac's point that in the European labor markets there is a
concentration on a need for jobs that are paying higher wage rates. And
that reflects the unique nature of labor markets across Europe -- a
different pattern of unionization, a different pattern of public versus
private sector employment in Europe. And there has to be a distinctly
European model for employment growth just as U.S. job growth reflects
the particular aspects of our own economy.

Q On the Middle East portion of the communique today, is
this essentially an invitation for Netanyahu to follow the policies of
his predecessor?

MR. MCCURRY: Well, there's an acknowledgement in the
Chairman's Statement about the recent election, about the importance of
security as an issue on the minds of the people of Israel. So I think
that there's certainly an acknowledgement in this statement that the
people of Israel spoke when they made their recent choice in their
election.

At the same time, the reaffirmation of the leader's support
for a just comprehensive and lasting peace in the region and the
exhortations to continue to progress on the various tracks of the peace
process ought to be clearly a signal to the world that these leaders
remain firmly committed to the general broad outlines of the process
that's now been underway for some time.

Q Was Secretary General Boutros-Ghali's decision to seek
another term raised in any of the sessions? Has it ever been a subject
for discussion this week?

MR. MCCURRY: I have been told, Anne, that it did not come
up in the session that they had at midday today. Whether it has come up
in any of his bilateral meetings with some of the people he's
encountered here I cannot say.

Q It hasn't come up with President --

MR. MCCURRY: In the discussion that the leaders had today
on the subject of the United Nations and on United Nations reform.

Q Mike, if the President in a position to -- for next
year, would he find the inclusion this year of the four -- organizations
valuable enough that he would work to invite any or all of them back?

MR. MCCURRY: I haven't had an opportunity to ask him that.
That might be a question you want to pose to him later.

In general, those that were in the U.S. delegation found
this discussion very helpful. And it was -- it is true that when you
look at institutions like the IMF, the World Bank, certain aspects of
the U.N. certainly as they relate to development and assistance to
emerging democracies, there needs to be greater harmonization. In fact,
James Wolfensohn of the World Bank in the session this morning actually
spent some time on the issue of harmonization of international
institutions particularly the IFIs. And I think that it was certainly a
useful discussion. I just don't know the President's reaction to that.
I can't point ahead towards Denver to see, if he is in the position to
host that summit, whether that's something he'd like to do.

Certainly, the importance of the work that these
international institutions do is underscored by the presence of these
respective leaders of these organizations here. And certainly, the
President agrees that those are subjects that ought properly be
addressed by the eight leaders.

That was a good waffle answer.

Q Yes.

MR. MCCURRY: How about that?

All right, anything else? As you know, the President is
departing almost immediately after his press conference. So we will not
have a lot of folks around afterwards. I'm trying to clear the decks
before we go.

Q Excuse me, one more quick one on Bosnia. If I remember
the Dayton, it all speaks in terms of Karadzic shouldn't have political
office or seek elective office. What happened or is there support for
the President's position as Christopher gave it to us that these
suspected war criminals not be able to have influence? Because, after
all, he has puppets who he gets elected.

MR. MCCURRY: Well, as you know, we maintain that they
should be out of power, out of influence and out of town, specifically
in The Hague. The Chairman's Statement, which suggests that they should
step down immediately and permanently from all public functions and take
no part in governmental decisions, is significant in the view of the
United States because it does suggest that any public role they would
play as, for example, party leaders, is not consistent with the Dayton
process.

Q That's not as far as you would like it to go, is it?

MR. MCCURRY: My understanding is the President was more
than satisfied with this element of the Chairman's Statement. In
general, as you know, we had worked hard to put forward an initiative
here on Bosnia. The President was delighted that that was addressed in
this separate statement. There was a feeling by the leaders that they
ought to detail the specific decisions they had taken with respect to
Bosnia, given the importance of that subject. And certainly the
President was satisfied, more than satisfied, with that outcome.

Q Mike, are you aware or have you discussed, did the
leaders discuss whether Mladic had a stroke?

MR. MCCURRY: I'm aware that there was that story
yesterday, but I saw him running around on CNN earlier today, so I think
that tends to discount that story.

Q Mike, was there any more substantive or detailed
discussion and development of aid among the IFIs, the heads? Did they
flesh out any particular way they'd cooperate, coordinate and pool
resources?

MR. MCCURRY: I'll have to check on that. I know it was
discussed. I don't know how -- in what detail. It was hard for me to
tell from the briefing I got on the discussion how much they went into
that. And part of that now may continue in the informal discussions
they have over lunch. I'll just have to check and see how much they got
into that. It might be a good follow-up question for the President.

Q Is there a consensus within the G-7 that Serbia should
not be admitted to IMF until Karadzic and Mladic have been --

MR. McCURRY: I'm not certain that that specifically is
addressed, but certainly the phrase in the Chairman's Statement
detailing the need for Karadzic to step down, for new leader to be
provided, consistent with the constitution of the Republika Serbska --
the leaders suggest that those steps would then enable the assistance
available under the terms of the Dayton Accords to be made available to
the Serbian Republic. That is a significant statement. That certainly
includes both direct lending that would come from international
institutions, and then forms of assistance that are being provided to
Bosnia for reconstruction.

You know, the United States has already announced its
package. The World Bank has been considering some additional lending
authority. That cannot flow to the Serbian Republic until there is
adherence to the formula set forth in the Dayton Accords.

Okay. Say again?

Q Are you going to Florida?

MR. McCURRY: No. Ms. Glynn will be going to Florida. Mr.
Johnson will be on Air Force One. Mr. McCurry will be taking care of
kids with chicken pox back home, but not until very late tonight.

What else? Okay. See you all -- we'll be at -- you've got
a brief pool spray, I guess, with Chernomrydin and then you've got the
President in the park holding forth.